A Commentary by Niagara At Large publisher Doug Draper
Okay, so let’s try to get this straight
Canada’s Reform/Conservative Party prime minister, Stephen Harper, always looks so self-satisfied, even when people he has appointed to the senate screw Canadian taxpayers out of hard-earned money.
We have got a Conservative (former Reform Party) government in Canada that always preached about keeping government out of the face of private business.
And now this same Conservative government, led by former Reform Party disciple Stephen Harper, suddenly wants to back its hind end into the faces of private corporations like Rogers, Cogeco, dairy farmers and any other numbers of one it can pick on to win some cheap votes in the next election
If you were unfortunate enough, as I was, to suffer your way through the Harper government’s latest speech from the Throne this Wednesday, October 16th, read by some grey heard old fart who is supposed to represent the Queen, you must have heard some of the ideas around screwing private company’s agendas in an attempt to win our votes.
There is the one around going after Cable companies like Cogeco and others to “unbundle” cable channel packages and all their costumers to cherry pick any channel they want or whatever price. There is also the one around going after telecommunications companies like Rogers (and don’t get me wrong, I have little or no use for Rogers) to charge exorbitant “roaming fees” for their wireless phone customers.
Then, apparently, Harper and his Conservatives are promising to somehow interfere in the free market place to “narrow the gap” between prices of consumer goods in Canada and across the border in the United States. And just how are Harper and company going to do that without interfering in the business of retailers on the Canadian side of the border?
If the Liberals or, God help some in the Harper Reform/Conservative Party camp, the NDP ever proposed meddling in private business like that, I could hear all of the usual card-carrying Conservative suspects around this Niagara region and beyond screaming anti-capitalism, socialism and so on. But apparently it is okay with these blind and hardened Harper partisans if his bunch does it for cheap political gain.
How interesting it is, and Harper’s blind followers would never see it, that it is okay to deregulate everything around the tar sands and pipelines proposed to carry that toxic goo across environmentally sensitive lands, but it is suddenly okay to kick the shit out of a cable company over what channels it offers to its customers.
How cheap and crass can the Harper government’s lunge for votes get before a majority of Canadians say enough bullshit.
Now I would like to especially hear below from hard-core conservatives who believe that governments have no place interfering in the affairs of private industry and the market place. Explain to the rest of us what business Harper now has telling companies like Rogers or Cogeco, or retailers north of the Canada/U.S. border, how to run their business.
(Niagara At Large invites you to share your views on this post. A reminder that we only post comments by individuals who share their first and last name with them.)
Niagara At Large 
I await Andy or Preston’s immediate responses. Really I do.
LikeLike
Harper’s supporters are more than confident with his ultra-right wing credentials. They know he is just showing a little pink to garner the votes of naive progressives. If elected on a pinko platform it wouldn’t stand a snowball’s chance in Havana of becoming reality. The first deficit budget would instantly change priorities.
LikeLike
Sorry Doug, first line should read “We have got a Social Credit”
LikeLike
I think the term this article begs is “double standard”. And regrettably that is what politics has become synonymous with, from climate change to Mexican visas to you name it.
Many always thought Stephen Harper would make a fine Obama / Harry Reid Democrat but I don’t think anyone expected him to morph into “Prime Minister Dad”. Maybe we should have.
LikeLike
Mr Smug is a bread and circuses believer. Divert us and throw us a few crumbs and we’ll be happy. Unfortunately, some will. We get the government we deserve. If I wanted to vote for a fringe pandering Republican I would have moved to the US and joined the Tea Baggers.
LikeLike
It is not uncommon for government (not just conservatives) to meddle in these areas. Look at the CRTC for example. This regulatory body, like all the others, is responsible for many things including rates consumers pay.
So, frankly, if it means I don’t have to pay for channels I don’t watch and it costs me less, I am all for that. If I can start buying products in Canada for ALMOST the same price as I can 20 minutes away in Lewiston… GREAT!
As for the motive for this, yeah its a little like throwing a bone, but am I going to look a gift horse in the mouth!
I have to ask….. why is this matter getting the attention and the EU trade deal not getting any in this column. Not a Harper fan but come on….
I think the throne speech and this historic BILLION DOLLAR trade deal deserves a little coverage at the expense of the sub-million dollar senate fiasco (which I am getting a little tired of).
While not a Harper fan I am hoping the BILLION DOLLAR trade deal is what voters remember. That’s of course if it is a good deal and on that note…. Doug you would have done us all a great service if you covered that in a little more depth.
Just sayin……
A Brief Response from NAL publisher Doug Draper – Well, Greg I read what you are just sayin …. but yo are also already sayi that this is a “historic” trade deal when it is so new that the rest of us have not seen the the full wording of it yet, and you are quoting the Harper government talking points that it is a “billion dollar” gold mine for Canada.
This may be a good deal on balance, but I think we need to take a few deep breaths here and take a closer look at a trade agreement which, after all, all partner contries have yet to ratify and, if they do, won’t be implemented for another two years.
Excuse me if I am a little skeptical abot a prime minister that seems willing to sell off raw materials in Canada to China and other countries and not process or refine them here, then sell the world the finished products. When, for example Harper and his party surrogates like Oliver go down to the states and try to sell the XL pipeline on the grounds that it and the refining facilities in Texas will enjoy 40,000 jobs from the export of raw bitumen down there, I wonder why we aren’t doing the refining and creating those jobs here, for Canadians.
On the other hand, I think we are now in a position to identify the meddling in the business affairs of companies like Cogeco and Rogers as the crass political vote-getting efforts that they are. If Harper really wanted to, he could have passed legislation that made illegal locked in, three year contracts with some of these corporations years ago. But he didn’t, did he. Me thinks he smells a tough election on the horizon. …. Just sayn….
LikeLike
Agreed Doug, the devil is in the details. My point exactly….. an examination of the details (albeit few) of this deal and what it could mean for all of us might have been an appropriate discussion piece was all I was sayin… Seemed to me that the focus of your article was on the lesser of recent news pieces.
re: skepticism – you are reading the words of the biggest skeptic out there.
re: pipeline – well refining is a messy business and personally I think the fact that we are fracking, oil sanding …. is enough for mother nature here in Canada. Yeah there is opportunity for job creation, but there is a cost…. I digress.
re: timing – agreed, and throwing the electorate a pet peeve bone at the same time.
Just sayin…. (and if you are going to make fun of my statement close you could at least spell it correctly LOL!).
LikeLike
If you read the entire Throne Speech, I don’t think Harper is swinging “left” at all. It is just the Harper supporting media pundits that are cherry picking the Throne Speech for things that might appeal to many of us, including non-supporters of Harper, such as what Greg mentioned about the right to pay only for the channels one wants to watch. It certainly covers a greater area where there are significant trade agreements going on, significant subsidies for the oil and gas industry (which in my opinion can do well without these subsidies), and so called balanced budget legislation similar to what we’ve been seeing hijack the US in the past few weeks … like, who needs this? Harper can disappear overnight along with his Senate buddies and nobody will miss them. I think the consumers themselves should demand more and better from the cable companies and as a matter of market forces and competition there will eventually be a right to pay only for the channels we want … etc. Our next step should be wireless services.
LikeLike